Debates
14 Jun 07
14 Jun 07
Originally posted by PalynkaI find his interpretations of the painting very convincing, as always (he's been writing on the subject since the 1960s), and his interpretation of Dali's lifestyle choices is shrewd. By the end of the article, I am willing to accept that Dali was indeed a cosmic jester incarnated as a Catalan bourgeois, while Picasso was an elitist whose passion for money, equal to Dali's, was overlooked by the adoring critics. (But Ballard overstates the case for Dali as a film-maker since Bunuel did 99% of the work).
I have to refuse until you give us your reaction to it or you won't give it at all. 😛
14 Jun 07
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI'm no art critic. Scratch that, I'm overly critical of what gets called "art". However, the writer interprets only one painting, but it sounds like it's dead on to me. I've never seen the painting, I'm just going off his description, so I could be dead wrong.
It's just an assessment of Salvador Dali's importance as an artist. Art critics tend to look down their nose at him; Ballard pegs him as The Man.
14 Jun 07
Originally posted by Bosse de NageO.K. so I lied. I have seen it. I'm not sure about anywhere else, but in the states people rob the melty clock deal for a lot of things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Persistence_of_Memory
This is the most recent blasphemy that I'm aware of.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Well_Wasted
14 Jun 07
Originally posted by MerkThat's funny.
O.K. so I lied. I have seen it. I'm not sure about anywhere else, but in the states people rob the melty clock deal for a lot of things.
This is the most recent blasphemy that I'm aware of.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Well_Wasted
Dali was a huge success when he first went to the States. His visual vocabulary soon entered the mainstream of popular culture. He's a bit like a science-fiction writer in that respect. Why didn't he get that reception elsewhere, I wonder.
14 Jun 07
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI agree. I particularly agree with this sentence:
I find his interpretations of the painting very convincing, as always (he's been writing on the subject since the 1960s), and his interpretation of Dali's lifestyle choices is shrewd. By the end of the article, I am willing to accept that Dali was indeed a cosmic jester incarnated as a Catalan bourgeois, while Picasso was an elitist whose passion for m ...[text shortened]... (But Ballard overstates the case for Dali as a film-maker since Bunuel did 99% of the work).
Our attention spans have shrunk to a single film-frame, and when we look at a Dalí painting we can instantly construct the rest of the movie from the key frame that he offers us.
I think he fails to give a convincing explanation on why in modern day the entertainment side of art has explosed. I believe that it has a lot to do with the enlargement of the scope and audience of artists, making art accessible to both experts and laymen. I'm one of the latter with respect to painting and therefore there are technical aspects which I cannot fully appreciate but which are nonetheless important for fully understanding a work. This enlargement of the audience brought in other forms of success for artists and a certain liberation from the shackles of critics and art snobs. This liberation comes at a price though, and perhaps this is the introduction of an increasing role for entertainment. The corollary is the appearance of simple entertainers posing as artists which led to a certain bias against the entertainment side of artists.
I particularly like that he doesn't criticize this aspect too harshly, as is so unfortunately typical of many critics. He emphasizes a certain evolution (or direction) that art took, which is a fact, and actually seems to compliment Dali for stabbing right at the heart of art snobs and art elitism.
14 Jun 07
Originally posted by Bosse de NageAmerica is odd that way. No matter a persons eccentricities, if a person reaches out and embraces America, Americans will usually return the embrace.
That's funny.
Dali was a huge success when he first went to the States. His visual vocabulary soon entered the mainstream of popular culture. He's a bit like a science-fiction writer in that respect. Why didn't he get that reception elsewhere, I wonder.
Just don't expect us to give the first hug. That's gay.